Nkume v Transunion Credit Bureau (Pty) Ltd and Another (2866/11) [2013] ZAECMHC 11; 2014 (1) SA 134 (ECM) (11 July 2013)

Nkume v Transunion Credit Bureau (Pty) Ltd and Another (2866/11) [2013] ZAECMHC 11; 2014 (1) SA 134 (ECM) (11 July 2013)

The court found that, although the applicant did not explicitly allege in the founding affidavit that the second respondent submitted adverse information to the first respondent, the extracts from the founding affidavit, together with the correspondence from the first respondent, established that the second respondent did submit such information. The second respondent failed to deny or admit this allegation in its answering affidavit, raising no genuine dispute of fact. The second respondent, as a credit provider, was required by Regulation 19(4) of the National Credit Act to give the applicant notice of its intention to submit adverse information, which it failed to do, rendering its...

Citation
[2013] ZAECMHC 11
Parties
Applicant: Sakhele Precious Nkume; Respondent: Transunion Credit Bureau (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Presles (Pty) Ltd
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 July 2013
Case Number
2866/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment Delivered After Opposed Application
Outcome
The application was granted in part. The second respondent's submission of adverse information was declared unlawful. Costs were awarded against both respondents jointly and severally up to the date of withdrawal against the first respondent, and thereafter against the second respondent alone.
Judges
D.Z. Dukada
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Adverse Credit Information, Consumer Protection, Notice Requirements, Costs Award
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure National Credit Act Adverse Credit Information Consumer Protection Notice Requirements Costs Award

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sakhele Precious Nkume

Applicant

Transunion Credit Bureau (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Presles (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment Delivered After Opposed Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second respondent unlawfully submitted adverse credit information about the applicant to the first respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the second respondent failed to provide the applicant with notice before submitting adverse information to the credit bureau.
  3. 3 Whether the first respondent failed to promptly expunge adverse information after rescission of the default judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although the applicant did not explicitly allege in the founding affidavit that the second respondent submitted adverse information to the first respondent, the extracts from the founding affidavit, together with the correspondence from the first respondent, established that the second respondent did submit such information. The second respondent failed to deny or admit this allegation in its answering affidavit, raising no genuine dispute of fact. The second respondent, as a credit provider, was required by Regulation 19(4) of the National Credit Act to give the applicant notice of its intention to submit adverse information, which it failed to do, rendering its...

Court Disposition

The application was granted in part. The second respondent's submission of adverse information was declared unlawful. Costs were awarded against both respondents jointly and severally up to the date of withdrawal against the first respondent, and thereafter against the second respondent alone.

Orders

  • The action of the second respondent of submitting or reporting adverse information concerning the applicant to the first respondent is declared unlawful.
  • First and second respondents are ordered to pay costs of this application jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved, up to and including the date of delivery of the Notice of Withdrawal of this application against the first respondent.